Fani Willis Allegations 'Could Not Be More Serious,' Attorney Warns

Attorney and legal analyst Jonathan Turley wrote in a Sunday post that the new allegations against Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis "could not be more serious."

Willis has been leading the investigation into former President Donald Trump's alleged efforts to interfere with and overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election in Georgia after Joe Biden won the state. Last summer, the investigation resulted in a grand jury issuing a criminal indictment against Trump and 18 co-defendants, charging all with conducting a "criminal racketeering enterprise." Trump himself has pleaded not guilty to the charges and accused the case of being an attempt to hurt his 2024 presidential campaign, as he has done for all of the legal troubles he is currently embroiled in.

Recently, Willis has become caught up in allegations leveled by Michael Roman, a former Trump campaign staffer and one of the co-defendants in the case, that she engaged in a romantic relationship with Nathan Wade, an outside attorney brought in to aid with the election interference investigation, and allegedly "enriched themselves" off the case. The lawyers for Roman have called for Willis and Wade to be removed from the case.

Willis herself has countered the allegations, stating that the personal relationship with Wade did not begin until after he was brought into the case and that "any personal relationship among members of the prosecution team does not amount to a disqualifying conflict of interest or otherwise harm a criminal defendant."

Meanwhile, Judge Scott McAfee held a series of hearings last week to determine if Willis and her office will be disqualified from the case.

On Friday, the legal team representing Trump in the case submitted a filing proposing the addition of supplemental information provided by criminal defense investigator Charles Mittelstadt, who claimed in an affidavit that Willis and Wade made more than 2,000 phone calls and had nearly 12,000 interactions across 2021. Willis has asked the court to dismiss the information as irrelevant, explaining that the affidavit does not include any context for the calls or interactions.

Writing on his personal website Sunday, Turley, a professor at George Washington University Law School who testified during Bill Clinton's impeachment inquiry in 1998 and at an impeachment hearing for Trump in 2019, argued that the new phone data allegations against Willis and Wade were of the utmost seriousness, explaining that "those calls, it is alleged, contradict the sworn testimony of both prosecutors on their relationship."

"They have insisted that they did not become romantically involved until shortly after Wade was hired by Willis in the Trump case," Turley wrote. "They also downplayed how often they spoke, describing a limited level of contact in 2021. Investigator Charles Mittelstadt submitted an affidavit discussing over 2,000 voice calls and just under 12,000 text messages from the 11-month period of January to November 2021. That later date is when Wade was hired."

Turley did stress in his post that "these records have not been fully vetted in court." Nevertheless, he argued that if the information is confirmed to contradict Willis' claims about her relationship with Wade, "this would make this controversy far more serious than disqualification from this case. It could raise concerns over potential criminal conduct. It could also push the court to refer both attorneys to the bar."

Turley has in the past suggested that the criminal case against Trump in Fulton County is not as strong as it is for some of his co-defendants, and stated that he has "doubts" about the case.

Turley also told Newsweek via email on Saturday that Willis and Wade should "step aside" in Trump's Georgia case, adding that their "problems are escalating."

"The response of Willis and Wade is now eclipsing the original allegations. They have placed their personal interests before the case and the office. Most importantly, they have allowed those interests to transcend the public interest in the case. They should clearly step aside," he wrote. "However, there are now alleging of false filings with the court and even perjury. The problems are escalating for both prosecutors."

Speaking with Newsweek on Sunday, Dave Aronberg, the state attorney in Florida's Palm Beach County and legal expert, concurred with Willis' arguments that the phone data lacks context and should not currently have much impact, but also that it could be harmful to her and Wade's case if it is accepted by McAfee down the line.

"The phone pinging data is inexact and not a smoking gun, but would support the testimony of defense witness Robin Yeartie," he explained. "If Judge McAfee accepts it as evidence then it will hurt DA Fani Willis and Nathan Wade. If the judge concludes that they lied to the court then I think they will be removed from the case and could face disciplinary action from the bar."

Update 2/25/24, 4:55 p.m. ET: This article was updated with comment from Aronberg.